Yeah, but I'm pretty sure slimbeast is just a console/PC player, which while it's microsofts fault, i think they loss lead with the 360.

Digital Property rights to screw over paying customers.

Things like "You can only install this game 3 times"

"You can't have a program installed on 2 computers."

Locking DLC on one console & 1 username rather then only one of those.

Strength to negotiate other things, for example the industry is using piracy to explain why they need radio changes.

Tieing games to accounts so your forced to give info.

"Online fees" like they use to hurt used game sales.

or alternativly

Just stubborn mindset.  I mean hell look at politicians.  When people think one thing they are more willing to believe someone else did something wrong and come up with biased arguements rather then except the truth.

My game didn't sell?  It must be piracy, because i'm great!

Ah ah can't argue your way with facts so just gonna try to bully it ?

Music revenue were twice as big before pirates started appear but still you're clinging to that crazy idea that they had no effect on the decline of revenue...

You know  that it only takes 30 seconds to research your argument instead of bringing random things that turn out to be false.

In other words we're going to cut your income by 50% over the next 10 years but don't worry, you were in a bubble so no big deal........

"Before piracy appeared"... when was that exactly?   Music "piracy" has existed since blank cassettes.

Aside from which, do you know what a bubble is?

Without piracy the bubble would of shrunk income to 50% or less anyway.

You know, pricefixing lawsuit lost?  MP3's allowing people to buy singles?

Actual sales are up, revenue is down.

You may as well blame the housing bubble burst on people squatting in abandoned buildings.

People aren't buying less. 

They are buying smarter and cheaper.

Of course, we've gone off the topic of the government reports in which you had no answer.

Because you essentially know your wrong but don't want to admit it. 

Either publically or to yourself, I can't say which.

Personally, I'm going to stick with prevailing scientific theory. 

You can keep ignoring it at your leisure, however i'm going to start ignoring you, since your waaay to invested in this and don't want an actual resonable discussion, and instead wish to rant, cling to silly disproven arguements with questionable correlation inoring actual proven confounding variables and ignoring the statistics as provided.

Your worse than a poltician with your attempts at spin.

We are still waiting for links for these valid studies and a proof that sales were up and revenue were down (and don't count a single or mp3 sold equal a CD as the later would have 14 musics usually)...

When you prove booth with real data we can agree you are the supreme lord of truth.

I don't get your arguement here.  You are argueing that because in the past people were forced to buy a bunch of songs bundled together with the couple they wanted....

That piracy is causing a loss of sales because people can buy ONLY the songs they want on Itunes?

That's exactly what i'm talking about.  You are so focused on trying to prove something that you are missing the forrest from the trees.

People aren't forced to spend 19.99 on 14 songs anymore, or if you are a rap fan, 12 songs and like 8 really bad comedy skits.

Instead it's 4-5 bucks for the few songs you want.

I mean, have any of you been in a CD store lately  everything is 5-10 dollars cheaper then the 90s.

"Random college study" but hey, it's better then no study or a"paid for" study but...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2009/apr/21/study-finds-pirates-buy-more-music

So why would you blame piracy?

You didn't understood what i said i see...

What i mean is when people pointed out that the market is half of what it used to be, and you said it was a bubble burst by the law not by pirates.

So as in profit or $$ sold you can't arguee so i let you prove amount sold (as the prices droped we can't be fair compairing $$ i agree)... so i will wait you to prove that the amount sold now is greater than before piracy through napster became really easy.

But to be fair you are the one that can't compare the selling of 1 song = 1 album as it have more songs. This is mostly because the market reality were different and you can't compare both.

I'll wait for the data of amount of content sold before and know for your point...

About the a random is study is better than a paid one, how can you know if the random isn't paid by anyone or done by people that wanted to bias it the other way?

Another thing, if this study were a Doctorate thesis, a University Study published in a renowed Journal i would take in consideration... a Study published in a newspaper??? i won't even bother.

I want to see the methods, range of data and eveything, a summary by a jornalist isn't even close of a study.

EDIT: I read the article, the study is just mencioned in that... and even tough if you read it the conclusion is dumb, so people that download free content is 10x more likely to buy downloadable content than people that don't download, genius remark... of course my mother wouldn't buy a song in Itunes as she doesn't even know how to dowload a music in the internet and buy in CD...

Also in the same article they say revenues have dropped, but digital download have risen, but not clearly enough to make the market the same as before so i still fail to see your point.

Another thing i want to see those economic studies that proves that in general people preffer to pay the right price than to have it for free..

If those things were true there would never been slavery, or slow wages and everything else... human want the most benefits for him.

I can see piracy helping spread content and making people know things that wouldn't be knowed if there wasn't for piracy. But this is most likely when piracy isn't something that anyone can do without any trouble because in this case the urge to buy will be lessened.

And about pirating because you don't have a job still you graduate and then start buying i can relate... I done it in the past but know i buy all my games, but at the same time i know 10x more people that still pirate even having an incoming.

This is why you can't trust random studies, if you bias it to choose the group you want to focus than your outcome will favor your point... so as a paid study from developer would say piracy is bad one paid by Geohot would show it's great, so the study you provided would be flawed (even mention Piratebay in the article)... and i still don't see what good the developer would see in blaming pirates if the piracy free world didn't helped them, because don't matter how much they make excuses it won't bring money or favor their marketshare.

That's just called... basic economic theory.   It's quite literally the foundation of all modern economics.  You won't see any articles on that in the same way that you won't find any scientific articles on "This new amazing thing called gravity."

If i'm not wrong super string theory is applied in gravity as Eistein expanded relativity theory. If one thing in science just the axioms don't change (as "there is gravity") but how it work always change during more discoveries...

And all time economics have new studies that change fundation, if not why would be neo-liberals, classics and different lines of studies??? Are you economist by the way?? Because China growth were based in piracy and stealth that didn't helped other markets if not for theirself.

I see you skiped the discussion about the article you brought and how piracy help music...

And in the market theories i studied the basis were never that a person preffer to buy for the right price than to steal... people don't steal for 2 reasons, one is the fear of being caught and the other ethics and social reason not because they like to spend their money... maybe you should put togheter the studies from diferent knowledges... the foundation of humanity is to take by force when you can.

I'll lunch and i'll finish soon.